LONG BEACH, CA—Taking the stage during today's "Dream!" session at the TED2013 conference, Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors and SpaceX, sat down with TED curator and host Chris Anderson to discuss his serial entrepreneurship and vision for the future. Anderson started with the obvious. “Why try to build an electric car?” he asked Musk.

Musk said he believes it's an imperative. “It’s extremely important that we have sustainable transport and sustainable engine production,” Musk said. Our society, Musk argued, will continue to be dependent on electricity for the foreseeable future, and however that electricity is generated, it only makes sense to build our transportation system around it. Even though an increase in electric usage might mean more coal and natural gas burning at the electric company, Musk told the crowd that the efficiencies achievable at scale at the power plant are more environmentally friendly than the combustion engine alternatives.

Musk also believes that electric cars are now practical for many customers. “There are far more charging stations than people realize,” he said. California and Nevada are covered, and the eastern seaboard from Boston to Washington, DC is already covered. Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said.

The CEO doesn’t believe that natural gas and coal are going to take us into the future, either. Turning to discuss the national solar energy company SolarCity, Musk said that solar will ultimately beat every other energy source in the long run. What’s needed is an effort to drive the cost of installation and financing low enough that it becomes practical for consumers. Once installed, solar panels could produce electricity for “decades,” maybe even 100 years. It’s the upfront cost that is holding people back, he believes.

Musk discussed one nascent solution that could solve the cost problem: consumers could lease solar panels on their roofs at home, paying less than they would on their power bill otherwise, while the installation companies will be able to run the mass of leased panels as a distributed grid. “In roughly 18 years, I think we’ll see more power from solar than anything else,” Musk said. A distributed grid, he added, is key to this.

Curiously, Musk did note that there is one technology that isn't likely to ever go electric and benefit from solar. And it just happens to be related to his other venture, SpaceX. The rocket, he said, will always burn fuel.

So why start a space company? “The goal of SpaceX is to create a rapidly and fully reusable rocket,” he remarked. Ultimately he wants to build rockets that return, in stages, to the launch site. Anderson then asked why Musk hasn’t patented his advances. “Since our primary competition is national governments, the enforcement of patents is questionable,” he chimed, to much laughter.

Musk believes that humanity belongs roaming the stars. He would just like to make sure we’re all driving electric cars to the spaceport.

118 Reader Comments

Rockets may always burn fuel, but I like the idea that we'll find a different type of propulsion system. Ideally, it would be one that doesn't require lifting off from earth. If we could figure out the space tether, or something equivalent, we could build and launch ships straight from orbit, and eventually this is how we'll have to do it as our loads get bigger and trips longer.

He doesn't address the reality of solar. And that is it will not make any significant contribution to our power needs in the foreseeable future. In order for that to happen we need to make some major advances in physics and materials. that or we have to start building orbiting solar power stations which beam the power they generate down to earth. The true future of clean power for our planet is no solar. It's fusion and it's closer than you think:

"Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said."

The 'why' of EVs is often carbon output, but it's just now starting to tip into positive TCO for many people as well.

I'm all for considering a BEV for my next vehicle purchase (sadly, soon) - but when I read that several of the largest ocean-going vessels in the world overwhelm the carbon output of the entire global fleet of cars I can't help but feel that doing my part isn't doing anything at all

“That’s the natural cadence of a trip” - True especially if you have kids.

Ever since Jobs died, I've replaced him with Musk as my new "nerd hero". After seeing him go head to head with the NYT, I think they're more alike in ways I didn't realize until now. They have their creations, and they're very protective of them. They work very hard to succeed, even with multiple companies at once (Jobs: Apple, Pixar; Musk: Tesla, SpaceX).

Here is to hoping batteries, solar panels, and rocket scientists carry us into the future better than we can imagine.

Rockets may always burn fuel, but I like the idea that we'll find a different type of propulsion system. Ideally, it would be one that doesn't require lifting off from earth. If we could figure out the space tether, or something equivalent, we could build and launch ships straight from orbit, and eventually this is how we'll have to do it as our loads get bigger and trips longer.

Rockets may always burn fuel, but I like the idea that we'll find a different type of propulsion system. Ideally, it would be one that doesn't require lifting off from earth. If we could figure out the space tether, or something equivalent, we could build and launch ships straight from orbit, and eventually this is how we'll have to do it as our loads get bigger and trips longer.

A friend recently took delivery of his Tesla Model S and I finally got to drive it on Sunday.

It is awesome.

We drove it for a little over three hours, flexing its muscle on various freeway on ramps and covering two hundred miles in the process. When we got back to his house we plugged it in and that was it.

The same friends off-sets the majority of his electricity bill via solar panels on his roof.

The performance of the Telsa S is pretty incredible. In a straight line it is probably the equal of my Elise, but it is quiet and the acceleration is simply 'never ending', it truly feels like the proverbial 'hand of god' pushing it along. It is also very comfortable and nice to drive too.

"Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said."

Yeah, OR we could get a decent train network in place.

Trains would work if people were willing to walk more carrying their bags, or bring with them a folding bike such as a Brompton for a longer trip from the train station. But they aren't and they won't. How are they going to get from the train/bus station to where they are going?

Future of transport is probably small electric cars that drive themselves and can hook up wirelessly and travel together in convoys to avoid the ripple effect of stop-and-go traffic. Probably.

He doesn't address the reality of solar. And that is it will not make any significant contribution to our power needs in the foreseeable future.

I think you underestimate just how much power solar can generate.

It is entirely feasible for 100% of the world's energy needs to come from solar. It wouldn't even be very expensive, compared to the cost of building coal mines and oil rigs.

g0m3r619 wrote:

In order for that to happen we need to make some major advances in physics and materials.

No we don't.

For a small system, you use photovoltaics. For a large system you heat up something like sand (into liquid glass) and then extract the energy using similar techniques to a nuclear power station (expose water to something hot, it turns into steam, which blasts through turbines as it cools down and becomes liquid, and then you expose it to the hot object again).

The advantage of the large system is you don't need to use batteries, which is an inefficient method of storing power. Sand can stay hot for weeks, and you can expose it to water as quickly or slowly as you want as power demands change. The advantage of photovoltaics is they are very low maintenance.

We know how to do it now, we have done it in thousands of small systems and a handful of massive systems. It works. We just don't have funding available because all of it is currently going elsewhere. And good luck to any politician who suggests firing every single worker in the oil and coal industries.

If I was in government, I would push for a tax (0.25%, 2%, 10%, whatever) on all non-renewable energy generation which is spent on solar.

Rockets may always burn fuel, but I like the idea that we'll find a different type of propulsion system. Ideally, it would be one that doesn't require lifting off from earth. If we could figure out the space tether, or something equivalent, we could build and launch ships straight from orbit, and eventually this is how we'll have to do it as our loads get bigger and trips longer.

He doesn't address the reality of solar. And that is it will not make any significant contribution to our power needs in the foreseeable future. In order for that to happen we need to make some major advances in physics and materials. that or we have to start building orbiting solar power stations which beam the power they generate down to earth. The true future of clean power for our planet is no solar. It's fusion and it's closer than you think:

"Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said."

Yeah, OR we could get a decent train network in place.

Trains would work if people were willing to walk more carrying their bags, or bring with them a folding bike such as a Brompton for a longer trip from the train station. But they aren't and they won't. How are they going to get from the train/bus station to where they are going?

Future of transport is probably small electric cars that drive themselves and can hook up wirelessly and travel together in convoys to avoid the ripple effect of stop-and-go traffic. Probably.

Well, they're willing to do that with planes, for trips that would require that sort of cadence. The issue with trains seems to be economics. For example, I can buy a roundtrip ticket to LA fly roundtrip to LA for $190-220, one way flight time of 2 hours. I can drive there in 10 hours for $120 in gas($240 roundtrip), and take up to 4 people. Or I can hop on Amtrak for $200 roundtrip. Flying is cheapest and fastest if I'm by myself, driving is cheapest, but not fastest, if I am taking a group. A train ticket would have to be something like $80-$100 round trip to be competitive with flying AND attract people that might consider driving if they have more than one person. I don't think charging 1/2 the price will go over well.

They should be called battery cars because they are all about the battery. If the batteries were any good anyone could make a good car out of them as electric motors are better than combustion. With crap batteries the result will be crap no matter how fine the rest of the car.

The batteries we have now are crap. Somewhere around four times better in cost and performance they would be worthy. If the chemists find a way to make that happen battery cars will be routine and good leaving Tesla up to its ears in competition. Without good batteries it is all just a high priced techno toy.

With twenty minute charges every three hours, how many chargers are needed on each car park so that there's always one free when you arrive? (Serious question, how many would be needed?)

My car needs gas every ~3hrs and it takes about 10 minutes to stop, gas up, buy coffee and head out of the gas station.

It is rare that every pump I ever stop is occupied - more likely that less than a 1/4 of them are.

So if the charging takes 4x longer than a gas fill-up, I presume that the infrastructure would have to resemble the current gas station network plus some, assuming 100% electric car adoption ?

They already have the parking space for that (usually). I would guess that the tough part would be handling the power requirements. 20-30 cars drawing I don't want to know how many KW.

My understanding is that the infrastructure required to provide more EV chargers is significantly simpler than what's required to provide more gas pumps. It's a one-time cabling cost, as opposed to the giant underground holding tank which needs to be refilled by an oil tanker every X hours. And the electric "pumps" are much simpler and cheaper.

Instead of charging stations, why not just stretch a long power line cars could tether too during long trips?

Car enters highway and hooks "arm" or "tether" or whatever to an electric rail or wire or whatever that runs the length of the highway. While hooked to it, the car draws power directly from the line to power itself, bypassing the battery. And, maybe the car recharges its battery while it's hooked to the line and cruising down the road at 70mph. Exit at your destination with a full battery able to drive around for another 3 hours. While you're hooked to the highway transit power system, you're billed for your power usage.

Since we already have powerlines stretching across the nation proving we can run them that long, I don't see why we're trying to re-invent the "stop at the gas station" model with electrics.

With a self-driving car + power line highway system, you could kick back in your electric to snooze for 500 miles then wake up once you're at your destination w/o having to worry about stopping to recharge.

Likewise, I thought the allure of electrics was being able to plug them into a normal electric outlet. Now we need charging stations? That obviously adds overhead. What's the benefit ... faster charging?

My car needs gas every ~3hrs and it takes about 10 minutes to stop, gas up, buy coffee and head out of the gas station.

Wait what? Every 3hrs? Modern (European) diesels do 500-1000 miles on one tank.

That's because petrol stations are much more thinly spread than in the US. At least, that was my experience in Germany.

3 hours is still a little short for an american car, but I still believe it. The Prius has a small tank. If I run it nearly dry, I can cram 8 gallons into it. If you like to keep 1/4 tank in reserve, you'll be stopping at about 3 hours. One of the few criticisms I have of the Prius as a car.

Any one who has used a laptop, or other battery operated device can verify that after repeated use, charges and discharges. The battery loses it's potential chargeable range. Meaning you will get less use of the battery the more you use it. This is one thing that is keeping people from going this route. No one want's to buy a multi-thousand dollar car battery more than once.

"Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said."

Yeah, OR we could get a decent train network in place.

Trains would work if people were willing to walk more carrying their bags, or bring with them a folding bike such as a Brompton for a longer trip from the train station. But they aren't and they won't. How are they going to get from the train/bus station to where they are going?

Future of transport is probably small electric cars that drive themselves and can hook up wirelessly and travel together in convoys to avoid the ripple effect of stop-and-go traffic. Probably.

We've got these great things called 'busses' and 'taxis'. have you heard of them? Works really well with trains as part of a comprehensive transportation network.

My car needs gas every ~3hrs and it takes about 10 minutes to stop, gas up, buy coffee and head out of the gas station.

Wait what? Every 3hrs? Modern (European) diesels do 500-1000 miles on one tank.

How many people do you know who would be willing to drive 700 miles in 7 hours without so much as a bathroom break?

I wasn't replying on Musk, I was replying on "fragile"s car, which seems quite gas hungry. The general point is that modern diesels only take up a spot at a gas station about 5 minutes every 10 hours.

I drive an Elise - around town it averages around 17mpg and has a 10.5 gallon tank (fill up after 9 ish gallons of use is normal), so it has a range of about 155 miles. On a road trip it averages 22mpg - the same 9 gallons lasts 195 miles or so - at 65mph that is three hours.

When I take it on a track day it needs gas every 40 minutes or so - generally I can just about run two 20 minute session from full to fuel starvation..........

They already have the parking space for that (usually). I would guess that the tough part would be handling the power requirements. 20-30 cars drawing I don't want to know how many KW.

My understanding is that the infrastructure required to provide more EV chargers is significantly simpler than what's required to provide more gas pumps. It's a one-time cabling cost, as opposed to the giant underground holding tank which needs to be refilled by an oil tanker every X hours. And the electric "pumps" are much simpler and cheaper.

I'm afraid it's more complicated.AC charging stations (glorified outlets) are cheap, but they're limited to ~20 kW in North America (240Vx80A) and 44 kW in Europe (3x230Vx63A) and unlikely to go beyond this due to size and weight constrains.

DC charging stations can go higher but they're expensive due to the power electronics (on top of power supply, etc).A Tesla Model S, with an 85 kWh batter (~300 miles) can accept a peak of 90 kW charging power, but even so, the average power is only ~55 kW (the process slows down as the battery fills up).

To charge an 85 kW battery in 20 minutes you'd need an average of 225 kW, which probably means a peak of ~500 kW.Such charger would be quite expensive. And the charging cable and connector would be a small monster.Also, a battery capable of accepting 500 kW would be quite an over-design compared to a typical car's power needs (100-200 kW during short bursts).

"Ultimately, Musk wants to get the grid spread out across the country to support three-hour drives with 20-minute stops, which he says is a natural and comfortable break. “That’s the natural cadence of a trip,” he said."

Yeah, OR we could get a decent train network in place.

While I'm for more public transport, I don't see the end of transportation on demand any time soon.

He doesn't address the reality of solar. And that is it will not make any significant contribution to our power needs in the foreseeable future.

I think you underestimate just how much power solar can generate.

It is entirely feasible for 100% of the world's energy needs to come from solar. It wouldn't even be very expensive, compared to the cost of building coal mines and oil rigs.

g0m3r619 wrote:

In order for that to happen we need to make some major advances in physics and materials.

No we don't.

For a small system, you use photovoltaics. For a large system you heat up something like sand (into liquid glass) and then extract the energy using similar techniques to a nuclear power station (expose water to something hot, it turns into steam, which blasts through turbines as it cools down and becomes liquid, and then you expose it to the hot object again).

The advantage of the large system is you don't need to use batteries, which is an inefficient method of storing power. Sand can stay hot for weeks, and you can expose it to water as quickly or slowly as you want as power demands change. The advantage of photovoltaics is they are very low maintenance.

We know how to do it now, we have done it in thousands of small systems and a handful of massive systems. It works. We just don't have funding available because all of it is currently going elsewhere. And good luck to any politician who suggests firing every single worker in the oil and coal industries.

If I was in government, I would push for a tax (0.25%, 2%, 10%, whatever) on all non-renewable energy generation which is spent on solar.

When I was at university, many years ago, we were taught that PV's take more energy to produce, than they generate over their lifetime.

If this hasn't changed, then they're NOT an energy generation method, they're just a way of kicking the energy down the road. So the question now is do they have a lifetime generation that's greater than their energy cost to manufacture? If not, they're still not a solution, at all.

Any one who has used a laptop, or other battery operated device can verify that after repeated use, charges and discharges. The battery loses it's potential chargeable range. Meaning you will get less use of the battery the more you use it. This is one thing that is keeping people from going this route. No one want's to buy a multi-thousand dollar car battery more than once.

No oil system, oil pan, oil changes affecting gas mileage.No fuel system (equivalent of going from tubes to solid state).No water jacket cooling system.I haven't read enough to know if they did away with the transmission; certainly simpler if not.Regenerative braking reduces brake wear and repair.Electric cars (not hybrids) are HUGELY simpler than internal combustion cars. Yes, the battery expense comes all at once, but the savings along the way should more than pay for it. Sure, there will be new problems, but these will be cured with time.

Ken Fisher / Ken is the founder & Editor-in-Chief of Ars Technica. A veteran of the IT industry and a scholar of antiquity, Ken studies the emergence of intellectual property regimes and their effects on culture and innovation.